It is an established fact beyond refute that the establishment has always refused to debate revisionists (or holocaust deniers) on the grounds they are hateful and anti-semitic (etc) and not to give them a platform for hate speech- rather than the real reason that they themselves are the hate speakers denying a platform for the truth and that they would get and always have been utterly demolished in any such encounter (am not aware of a single exterminationist victory academically in over 85 years)...

Lately however, there seems to be an establishment effort to create a kind of "reverse" psychology in those who know nothing about the Holocaust Myth, it's revisionism or the historical development of the two intertwined.

The effort seems to be to create the impression that the deniers themselves now seek to evade debate on the topic.

All here at codoh are familiar with the common tactic where representatives from HDOT, Holocaust Controversies or NIZKOR come here- get a licking like never before, only to retreat to their own sites claiming they "won" here or were "persecuted" or "censored" etc etc- all garbage of course.

1. According to the liar-site "nizkor"- the CODOH was offered to "debate" them and CODOH "refused".

No reason was stated, nor was there any document produced except an email correspondence was alleged to confirm this. OF course when viewing their 66 Q&A's- we find that the questions were put forward with a short hand answer from the IHR and comprehensively responded to by NIZKOR (including nothing factual and everything deliberately wrong or misrepresented)- so this is not a "debate" at all, as one would expect only from a forum like entity...

2. http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... lodes.html Then there's this example where Holocaust Controversies tries to label that Denierbud "tried to create rules for the debate" as if they were unfounded and a sign that real debate was not wanted as a result, rather than for the obvious stated reason to avoid spamming, ad homenim attacks and remain specific about the topic (a common tactic of the liar is to go off topic as soon as busted). Here it is also stated that CODOH "withdrew" from debate...

Do any admins or advanced revisionists have any light to shed on the topic of fraudulent claims of debate dodge on the part of revsisionists?

Whilst it seems like an obvious shill to us- to an average person- whom these sites are intended for, they might seem credible.

Rational thought leads to the obvious conclusion that the sites that do not allow any free debate are the "dodgers" and the open debate site are not (obviously)- but then again rational thought would render "gas chambers" and the "holocaust" irrational in the first place.

Elroy:Indeed, that is projection they are engaging in. A worn & thread bare tactic of desperation.

The problem for them is that the record of those from "The Holocaust Industry" who debated here is, well, here to be read.There are countless posts here by Industry insiders. Anyone can read them.Guys like Andrew Mathis, Roberto Muehlenkamp, 'Hans', Nessie, Sergey, etc. .. just to name a few of the very, very many that came here & did rather poorly.Hence the 'Industry's' desire to distract from their lack of success.

I don't know if he regards himself as part of the "establishment" but Michael Shermer from Skeptic magazine did indeed debate Mark Weber from the IHR back in 1995 before there was a CODOH forum -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xB73Pg4_08

I don't know if anyone has extended an invitation to Shermer to debate here.

There are 2 sides to every story - always listen or read both points of view and make up your own mind. Don't let others do your thinking for you.

Mortimer wrote:I don't know if he regards himself as part of the "establishment" but Michael Shermer from Skeptic magazine did indeed debate Mark Weber from the IHR back in 1995 before there was a CODOH forum -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xB73Pg4_08

Not only was that debate in the previous millennium; it is also one of the best examples of why the Hoaxers have no intention of debating knowledgeable Revisionists.

Shermer was crushed like a bug by Mark Weber!

Could you imagine Shermer, Van Pelt, or any other modern day Hoaxer debating someone like Mattogno or some of the Revisionists on the CODOH Forum in a moderated debate.

It would be a slap-down!

Maybe, just maybe, they believe what they are telling you about the 'holocaust', but maybe, just maybe, their contempt for your intelligence and your character is beyond anything you could ever have imagined. -- Bradley Smith

Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary which proves the claims are of mythical nature and these people denying reality, science they remain happy that typhus should be denied and six million were killed, in their own minds at least.

'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

Mortimer wrote:I don't know if he regards himself as part of the "establishment" but Michael Shermer from Skeptic magazine did indeed debate Mark Weber from the IHR back in 1995 before there was a CODOH forum -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xB73Pg4_08

Not only was that debate in the previous millennium; it is also one of the best examples of why the Hoaxers have no intention of debating knowledgeable Revisionists.

Shermer was crushed like a bug by Mark Weber!

Could you imagine Shermer, Van Pelt, or any other modern day Hoaxer debating someone like Mattogno or some of the Revisionists on the CODOH Forum in a moderated debate.

I've read the devastating Paul Grubach critique.I'm not sure if I've read the Mattogno critiques .... I'll check them out right now.

Maybe, just maybe, they believe what they are telling you about the 'holocaust', but maybe, just maybe, their contempt for your intelligence and your character is beyond anything you could ever have imagined. -- Bradley Smith

Elroy wrote:....1. According to the liar-site "nizkor"- the CODOH was offered to "debate" them and CODOH "refused".....

Nizkor pretends to be ready to debate. But all that I saw from this team were ad hominem attacks, twisting debating tactics, smearing and using factoid information. They are not interested in debate. Not at all.

It would be more pertinent to state the obvious which is that it is the holocaust lobby that refuses to debate. They claim to have all the answers and to be able to put the revisionists to shame, so why not ? Deborah Lipstadt claims the revisionist arguments are easily proven false so if that's the case she should be able to wipe the floor with them but she still refuses to debate -https://codoh.com/library/document/375/https://codoh.com/library/document/165/

There are 2 sides to every story - always listen or read both points of view and make up your own mind. Don't let others do your thinking for you.

Mortimer wrote:It would be more pertinent to state the obvious which is that it is the holocaust lobby that refuses to debate. They claim to have all the answers and to be able to put the revisionists to shame, so why not ? Deborah Lipstadt claims the revisionist arguments are easily proven false so if that's the case she should be able to wipe the floor with them but she still refuses to debate -https://codoh.com/library/document/375/https://codoh.com/library/document/165/

I find it rather funny that they wrestle with "Revisionist Arguments" (what they do often is to knock-down straw-men, they create for that simple purpose), since all they need to do is prove their case. They must prove the following:* NS-Government Plan to kill all Jews (just because they are Jews). * Industrial style killing of Jews in homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz, but also elsewhere. * Killing of Jews in the range of six million.

It's not enough to point out that the NS-government was deporting and claim that this somehow proves that there was an extermination plan. Pictures of victims of epidemic diseases aren't prove of homicidal gassings. "Where did they all go, if they weren't gassed" is also a bogus argument.... The burden of proof is on the exterminationist to explain were the traces of killing and remains of the dead bodies are.

If you got evidence for your Holocaust case, bring it on. Please back this up with verifiable material. No innuendo, no hide and seek with the evidence. And yes, no fallacious debate tactics or name calling. When someone drops out of a debate, because you twist facts and claims or you call him a Nazi or Anti-semite, dropping out is not a refusal to debate, but a refusal to waste time with people that actually don't want to debate anyway.